Squad

[Londonlisa2001]

It's a solid squad for sure with good options in attacking positions.

I personally believe it feels better due to the absolute trash we have been served up in the last God knows how many transfer windows.
The summer of 23 being the absolute highlight of disaster with Watson leading the charge.

I really hope there is some money coming in from commercial or other avenues because we have certainly spent more than expected and that even if it's spread over a few years....without financial incomings then it's a huge gamble and I mean huge!

The pressure has certainly cranked up a bit for Sheehan.....there will be an expectancy.

“really hope there is some money coming in from commercial or other avenues because we have certainly spent more than expected and that even if it's spread over a few years....without financial incomings then it's a huge gamble and I mean huge!”

Not sure whether you’re talking about FFP rules (which is a profit and loss based measure) or our financial position as a club (which is more of a cash and assets based measure) but whichever it is, I genuinely think people are forgetting the relatively huge savings that have been made this summer with the players that have left the club.

Just to give you an example, as you’ve now made several posts about this, if a player was on £25k total on-cost a week (wages plus taxes) and they leave, and another player joins that’s on £7k on-cost a week, that saving of £18k per week, over a five year contract length is £4.7m ish. Over a four year contract it’s £3.8m.
If that money is used to pay a £3m fee plus £300k signing bonus and agent fees, we’ve still ended up somewhere between £500k - £1.4m up on where we were.
For FFP the total cost of the player transfer fee plus signing bonus plus agent fees is capitalised and spread over the length of the contract.

Yet again, it doesn’t make any difference whatsoever for FFP when the cash leaves the building. For the transfer fee, for the signing bonus or for the agent fees. No difference at all.

We have had 12 players join plus Widell (costs weren’t in last year).

We have had 16 leave or go out on loan. Plus O’Brien, Peart Harris and Delcroix loans end. (I may have forgotten someone).

Included in those leaving are Pederson, Allen, Naughton, O’Brien (or Grimes), who were high earners. Plus Darling who was on a good chunk, plus first team salaries like Bianchini, Myko, Yates . Etc etc etc.

Some first teamers have had the contracts extended (Key and Tymon), which means a lower annual cost for FFP purposes (as it’s now spread over a longer period).

All those savings mount up.

From an asset perspective, we’ve signed mainly young players on whom we would expect to make profits in the future. And from a cash perspective, our ownership group are very wealthy and contain high profile names who would not want to be associated with financial failure.

If I had to guess, I’d imagine that we are fine for FFP at the moment, albeit probably quite tight to the limits, and they are probably planning for a future that sees commercial income being substantially increased. I would imagine next year’s deals being at a different level than this given the publicity of people like Snoop being involved. Plus there will be various commercial ventures kicking in this year.

In addition, they will be planning on either a financial windfall on promotion, or alternatively, if we do not achieve that for a few years, being able to sell at least a few of the young players that we now own for a substantial profit. In the meantime, they will be planning on covering any cash shortfalls from their own pockets.

I don’t agree that it’s a huge financial gamble - it seems to me to be pretty well thought out and a calculated move.

 

[magicdaps10]

“really hope there is some money coming in from commercial or other avenues because we have certainly spent more than expected and that even if it's spread over a few years....without financial incomings then it's a huge gamble and I mean huge!”

Not sure whether you’re talking about FFP rules (which is a profit and loss based measure) or our financial position as a club (which is more of a cash and assets based measure) but whichever it is, I genuinely think people are forgetting the relatively huge savings that have been made this summer with the players that have left the club.

Just to give you an example, as you’ve now made several posts about this, if a player was on £25k total on-cost a week (wages plus taxes) and they leave, and another player joins that’s on £7k on-cost a week, that saving of £18k per week, over a five year contract length is £4.7m ish. Over a four year contract it’s £3.8m.
If that money is used to pay a £3m fee plus £300k signing bonus and agent fees, we’ve still ended up somewhere between £500k - £1.4m up on where we were.
For FFP the total cost of the player transfer fee plus signing bonus plus agent fees is capitalised and spread over the length of the contract.

Yet again, it doesn’t make any difference whatsoever for FFP when the cash leaves the building. For the transfer fee, for the signing bonus or for the agent fees. No difference at all.

We have had 12 players join plus Widell (costs weren’t in last year).

We have had 16 leave or go out on loan. Plus O’Brien, Peart Harris and Delcroix loans end. (I may have forgotten someone).

Included in those leaving are Pederson, Allen, Naughton, O’Brien (or Grimes), who were high earners. Plus Darling who was on a good chunk, plus first team salaries like Bianchini, Myko, Yates . Etc etc etc.

Some first teamers have had the contracts extended (Key and Tymon), which means a lower annual cost for FFP purposes (as it’s now spread over a longer period).

All those savings mount up.

From an asset perspective, we’ve signed mainly young players on whom we would expect to make profits in the future. And from a cash perspective, our ownership group are very wealthy and contain high profile names who would not want to be associated with financial failure.

If I had to guess, I’d imagine that we are fine for FFP at the moment, albeit probably quite tight to the limits, and they are probably planning for a future that sees commercial income being substantially increased. I would imagine next year’s deals being at a different level than this given the publicity of people like Snoop being involved. Plus there will be various commercial ventures kicking in this year.

In addition, they will be planning on either a financial windfall on promotion, or alternatively, if we do not achieve that for a few years, being able to sell at least a few of the young players that we now own for a substantial profit. In the meantime, they will be planning on covering any cash shortfalls from their own pockets.

I don’t agree that it’s a huge financial gamble - it seems to me to be pretty well thought out and a calculated move.

Good read that Lisa and what you wrote is exactly what I am hoping is the case(to a point). We obviously won't have clarity on things straight away but it's going to be something to keep an eye out going forward.
The selling a player for a substantial profit is the area that is clearly a gamble if it's a route we need to go down, a gamble that a player performs, teams to be interested and are willing to pay X amount, having more younger players does certainly drop those odds of it happening though.

We certainly have a squad with a depth that allows us to take a hit on a sale far better than we could have 12 months prior and beyond....that is very impressive in itself.

It's going to be interesting to see how things pan out going forward. I myself though am confident in the new owners and I like to think they have a clear plan and they certainly seem to be more pro active than the previous lot

 

[LaJollaJack]

Oytstanding stuff from our American owners and best in class recruitment system.

Great to see proper football folk in our corridors of power again. Proper footy folk with a clever, innovative leading edge plan and execution.

Cannily hedging the managerial bet too, fair play.

This is now proper Next Level stuff, as per.